巴菲特：我的接班人是个男的

    虽然沃伦•巴菲特认为可口可乐公司（Coca-Cola）引起争议的高管股权分配方案有过度之嫌，但上周他并没有投票反对这项计划。此举给这位一直深得媒体宠爱的投资界传奇人物、综合型保险集团伯克希尔－哈撒韦公司（Berkshire Hathaway）首席执行官招来了一片批评之声。《纽约时报》（New York Times）专栏作家乔•诺切拉将巴菲特称为懦夫。可口可乐公司股东大会结束后不久，巴菲特接受了本刊采访，解释了自己的做法。

    虽然受到了批评，但巴菲特说，他认为自己已经对可口可乐的高管薪酬方案采取了强烈反对的立场。此外，他说自己几乎没有权力阻止公司给予高管过高的酬劳。这番话和几年前大相径庭，当时巴菲特曾撰文称，没有几个人有可能推翻美国公司那些高得离谱的高管薪酬方案，而像他这样的大股东就是其中之一。显然，巴菲特以及像他这样的人现在也落了下风。

    人们普遍相信，至少目前巴菲特挑选了一位男性继承者，对此他也予以了证实——很抱歉，特雷西•布里特•库尔（巴菲特的女性财务助理）。

    本刊：你是否认为美国公司高管的薪酬已经远远超过其他人？

    沃伦•巴菲特：我觉得和一位出色高管所能创造的价值相比，他们的薪酬还没有高到离谱的境地。如果你经营着一家数百亿美元的公司，从8到10这样的变化在价值上就存在巨大差异。我不觉得高管的收入和演艺人士或者体育明星的收入有什么不同。不过，我觉得在某些情况下对高管薪酬应该有所限制，但这差不多只能建立在自愿的基础上。

    以前你曾经说过，高管股权分配方案是 “免费彩票”而且“完全靠运气”；你还说，这些薪酬方案的对象是“像瑞普•范•温克尔（华盛顿•欧文小说中的遁世者）那样总想打个盹的管理者”。

    这些情况都有可能出现。

    2006年，你说改变高管薪酬过高局面的唯一途径就是像你这样的大股东站出来要求进行彻底变革。那你为什么不投票反对可口可乐的（股权）方案呢？

    我觉得投弃权票已经表明了我们的立场。这是伯克希尔发出的非常强烈的信号。它显然意味着我们不赞成这个方案。

    那你在董事人选方面为什么不投弃权票呢？

    因为实际上我觉得他们有一批很好的董事。这项计划已经成为历史，别人也这么干，所以我们也会这样做。这些公司不想对整个问题彻底进行重新探讨，这样做的可能性非常小，他们的顾问也不太可能提出这样的建议。

    那么企业就股权分配方案做的哪些工作会把高管薪酬资本化？在今后很多年里，为这项开支出钱都将是股东。

    实际上我曾经写到过这个问题——我还可能把它放到明年的年报里。这是给伯克希尔董事会的一份备忘录，内容是对于伯克希尔下一任CEO，也就是我的继任者，可能很敏感的股权分配方案我有什么看法。他——目前来说应该是一位男性——将是唯一获得股票期权的人，原因是只有他一个人负责让这家公司取得全面成功。

    可口可乐对自身股权分配方案进行辩解的理由之一是，它不光针对最高管理层，还包括6500名员工。但你认为这条理由站不住脚。

    对，我觉得这不是什么理由。

    让我们再回到瑞普•范•温克尔这类CEO的问题上。按照可口可乐的方案，这家公司的回报每年可能减少10%。那么，这些高管还有资格拿几十亿美元的薪酬吗？

    这是一笔分期支付的劳务费。

    你对托马斯•皮凯蒂关于贫富差距的新书《21世纪的资本》（Capital in the Twenty-First Century）有什么看法？

    我大概看了六篇评论。但还没有看这本书。

    你打算看这本书吗？

    我不知道。我看到的评论已经告诉我它讲的是什么。我可能会看，也可能不看，但我去读这类书的可能性比较大。

    《纽约时报》最近报道说，根据一项研究，你已经失去了超额回报。你还记得最后一次看到超额回报是在哪里吗？如果我找到了，我能把它据为己有吗？

    Last week, Warren Buffett declined to vote against a controversial stock option plan for Coca-Cola's (KO) top executives that he thought was excessive. That has unleashed a wave of criticism against the legendary investor and CEO of insurance conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA), typically a media darling. New York Times columnist Joe Nocera called Buffett a coward. Shortly after the Coke vote, Buffett sat down with Fortune to defend himself.

    Despite the criticism, Buffett says he believes he took a forceful stand against the Coke pay package. What's more, he says that he has little power to stop companies from handing out excessive pay. That's a big change from a few years ago, when Buffett wrote that large shareholders like himself were the only ones who could turn back runaway executive compensation within corporate America. Apparently, Buffett and others like him are outmatched as well.

    Buffett also confirmed the widely held belief that, at least for now, his picked successor is male. Sorry, Tracy Britt Cool.

    Fortune: Do you think executive compensation is out of whack with the rest of America?

    Warren Buffett: Well, I don't think it is out of whack with the value an outstanding executive could bring. If you run a multibillion-dollar company the difference between a 10 and an eight is huge in terms of value. I don't think it is out of line in terms of entertainers or sports figures. Still, almost on a voluntary basis, I think it should be somewhat restrained in some cases.

    In the past, you have said executive stock option plans are "a free lottery ticket" and "fair only by chance" and that they are compensation plans built for "managerial Rip Van Winkles who are looking to doze off."

    All of that can be true.

    In 2006, you said that the only way to change excessive executive compensation is if large shareholders like yourself take a stand -- demanding a fresh start. Why didn't you vote against the Coke [option] plan?

    I think we did take a stand in abstaining. That's a very loud voice coming from Berkshire. It obviously means we don't approve of the plan.

    Why not also abstain in the vote about the directors?

    Because I actually think they have a good bunch of directors. What was done with their plan is so much the other guys doing it so we will do the same thing. The idea of fundamentally reexamining the whole thing doesn't occur to these companies, and it's very unlikely to, and their consultants are not likely to recommend it.

    And what companies are doing with stock options is capitalizing executive compensation. It is shareholders years from now that are going to pay this expense.

    I actually have written -- I may put it in the annual report next year -- a memo to the board of directors of Berkshire as to what I think would be a sensible option plan for the CEO of Berkshire who succeeds me. And he would be -- in this case it would be a he at the present time -- the only one who would receive options because he would be the only one who is responsible for the overall success of the operation.

    One of the things Coke has said to defend its plan is that it's not just for its top executives but for its 6,500 employees. But you don't think that's a defense.

    No, I don't think that's a defense.

    And again, back to the Rip Van Winkle CEOs, according to the Coke plan, the company's return could go down 10% a year, and the executives would still qualify for billions?

    It's a royalty on time.

    Have you read the new book on inequality, Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century?

    I have read about six reviews on it. But not the book.

    Are you planning to read it?

    I don't know. I have read so many reviews I think I know what it says. I may or may not, but it is the kind of book that there is reasonable chance I will read.

    The New York Times said recently, based on a study, that you have lost your alpha. Do you remember the last place you saw it, and if I find it, can I keep it?